NationStates Jolt Archive

Which country do you think is combating terrorism most effectively? Poll coming.

What is it with this lot and France?

What is it with this lot and France?

You know, the Frogs wouldn't help us invade Iraq to take out Saddam, so ever since then, "France" has been the conservative whipping boy. Remember how the restaurant (is that a French word) at the Capitol renamed French Fries "Freedom Fries"? It goes along with "surrender monkeys." Much easier than actually findong out the French position on the invasion and thinking about it.

You know, the Frogs wouldn't help us invade Iraq to take out Saddam

I assumed it ran a little deeper. I wonder what Freud would say.

You know, the Frogs wouldn't help us invade Iraq to take out Saddam, so ever since then, "France" has been the conservative whipping boy. Remember how the restaurant (is that a French word) at the Capitol renamed French Fries "Freedom Fries"? It goes along with "surrender monkeys." Much easier than actually findong out the French position on the invasion and thinking about it.

It's amazing what one can get away with by using the word "Freedom" ad nauseam. Operation Enduring Freedom. Operation Iraqi Freedom. Operation Freedom Freedom Freeom. What, you don't like Freedom?

I assumed it ran a little deeper. I wonder what Freud would say.

That we have unresolved sexual issues with our respective mothers?

France is doing the best job of the three. The U.S. and U.K. are doing nothing but inflamming anti-Western sentiment and breeding future terrrorism. France, to its great credit, refused to involve itself in the Iraq War.

What, you don't like Freedom?

It's not that we don't like Freedom, per say. We just want it put up against a wall and shot.

"France" has been the conservative whipping boy.

I refrained from posting anything bad about France for the sake of objectivity -- why do you automatically assume the worst when you see France mentioned?

I assumed it ran a little deeper. I wonder what Freud would say.

Ah, but that's the thing, Freudian analysts aren't supposed to say anything, they're just supposed to listen as the patient talks his or her way through the issue. And anyway, I don't speak German, so ... ;)

It's not that we don't like Freedom, per say. We just want it put up against a wall and shot.

Okay, good. As long as you love freedom, it's okay to love it to death.

the only reason france wouldnt join is because to coin the quote they are surrender monkeys

That we have unresolved sexual issues with our respective mothers?

Sometimes a mother is just a mother.

the only reason france wouldnt join is because to coin the quote they are surrender monkeys

Please, do develop what I'm sure is a most interesting, insightful and well thought-out point of view.

France is doing the best job of the three. The U.S. and U.K. are doing nothing but inflamming anti-Western sentiment and breeding future terrrorism.

Britain did manage to foil an extensive terror plot quite effectively.

All three suck more wang than both of Bush's daughters on a weekend. America's is inflamming more terroism, (I like the antage of throwing water on a grease fire) Britians is ineffective, and France has already fallen. (there are places in France were the government will dare not tresspass as of fear to anger muslims who live there, they bassically have surrenderd it). I like Russia's methood. A couple years ago a chechen rebel terroist abducted a Russian diplomat with plans to execute him. As terroists often let their identities be known, the Russians abducted the terrorists family and started sending the terrorist fingers, and toes, and other body parts. The diplomat was released soon afterwards. See that way it worked, but it didn't also bomb the shit out of half of the country killing 100,000 people. (btw I do realize Russia ended up doing that to Chechnyia anyways......)

I refrained from posting anything bad about France for the sake of objectivity -- why do you automatically assume the worst when you see France mentioned?

I mean this in the nicest possible way but, well, your recent threads have pointed in a certain direction, so when I see a new one from you asking for opnions on whether Britain, France or the US has a better policy on the War on Terror, certain expectations are raised. Now, had it been a poll on who makes the best wine, that would be something else.

Myrth showed me the classified documents detailing the exact strategies for countering terrorism for all three of these countries. Since no one, except Myrth and I, have seen them, we are the only ones who can have an informed opinion.

Myrth has decided this thread is therefore idiotic.

Please, do develop what I'm sure is a most interesting, insightful and well thought-out point of view.

We can hope he's only being facetious.

None of them is.

Although I haven't heard of French Muslims wanting to engage in terrorism, even though the government would've provided them with plenty of motivation (headscarves in school).

even though the government would've provided them with plenty of motivation (headscarves in school).

France is a secular country - a concept some people find a little hard to understand. Contrary to what foreign media propaganda has been saying, the ban is not exclusively on Muslim headscarves. It is on all religious symbols - Christian crosses, Jewish kippa, Sikh turbans, everything. And it only applies to public schools, not to private schools (or, for that matter, to universities, public or private).

I myself have mixed feelings about it, but the way people abroad have constantly misinterpreted the situation is a tad irritating.

I like Russia's methood. A couple years ago a chechen rebel terroist abducted a Russian diplomat with plans to execute him. As terroists often let their identities be known, the Russians abducted the terrorists family and started sending the terrorist fingers, and toes, and other body parts. The diplomat was released soon afterwards. See that way it worked, but it didn't also bomb the shit out of half of the country killing 100,000 people. (btw I do realize Russia ended up doing that to Chechnyia anyways......)

I'm sure you'd appreciate that method very much should your cousin ever turn into a terrorist and a government start removing your fingers to irk him. Willing to test that out?

I like Russia's methood. A couple years ago a chechen rebel terroist abducted a Russian diplomat with plans to execute him. As terroists often let their identities be known, the Russians abducted the terrorists family and started sending the terrorist fingers, and toes, and other body parts. The diplomat was released soon afterwards. See that way it worked, but it didn't also bomb the shit out of half of the country killing 100,000 people. (btw I do realize Russia ended up doing that to Chechnyia anyways......)

Wow, I can see that you are really a fan of civil rights. I'm sure you would hope everyday that no relative would turn terrorist as I'm sure you love your fingers.

I'm sure you'd appreciate that method very much should your cousin ever turn into a terrorist and a government start removing your fingers to irk him. Willing to test that out?

I stand corrected.

UK.

Which of the other two has, over the last 40 years, managed to bring a terrorist organisation to admitting defeat through dialogue and a military intelligence operation which was effective at taking out the terrorist organisation's leadership and organisation, without mass civilian casualties, and without allowing a situation to escalate into civil war?

I stand corrected.

Wait... No flaming? No quip? @_@...

In NS forum, a guy that, in my first post, simply says that he stands corrected, as opposed to flaming??? @_@

Wow! :D

You made my day, if you're not being sarcastic. ;)

I would have to say Britain or France. the reason? Simple.

They treat the problem of Islamic fundamentalism as what it is - crime. The so called "war on terrorism" in Europe is led by law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The Uk learnt its lesson during the "troubles". By refusing to admit they were at war with the IRA they didn't lend legitimacy to the Republican cause. IRA volunteers were not treated as soldiers or combatants, they were treated as criminals. This is what we are doing with fundamendalists in Britain - prosecuting them according to the law. All the time the US is treating the struggle against fundamentalism as a "war" they lend legitamacy to thier cause. They can say "we are at war" because that is what their opposition say. In Britain and the rest of Europe we say "you are not soldiers, you are criminals". When they break they law they are prosecuted.

If the US really wnt to beat Islamic fundamentalism they should take all those imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay and priosecute them according to US law. When (and if) found guilty carry out the sentance. If you claim to be fighting for freedom and rights, then you have to afford EVERYBODY that freedom and those rights.

Wait... No flaming? No quip? @_@...

In NS forum, a guy that, in my first post, simply says that he stands corrected, as opposed to flaming??? @_@

Wow! :D

You made my day, if you're not being sarcastic. ;)

You are spending too much time debating with MeansToAnEnd. Not everyone has to irritate you. :)

You are spending too much time debating with MeansToAnEnd. Not everyone has to irritate you. :)

Yes, but that's a real first! :D

Contrary to what foreign media propaganda has been saying, the ban is not exclusively on Muslim headscarves.
That's certainly true. But in the past few years it was generally the Muslim community which reacted the strongest against any sort of secularisation of their ways.
While the policy was certainly not anti-Muslim (at least not explicitly...you tell me the politicians didn't try and use this as a response to the whole terror and integration thing), sadly it must always be expected that some nutcases will see it that way.

But for whatever reason, I haven't heard of any major terror plots by French Muslims.

The French are pretty good. The British government is far too obsessed with crawling up the arses of the muslim 'community leaders' to effectively fight terrorism. Blair is such a pathetic little man, always begging to the muslim organistations and trying to treat them like they own this country. The spineless cretins that run our country won't send extremists back to their home countries if they may face a little rough treatment back home. But the French recently deported a convicted terrorist back to Tunisia despite the high risk of him facing torture back home. At least the French are willing to play a little dirty to get the job done.

That's certainly true. But in the past few years it was generally the Muslim community which reacted the strongest against any sort of secularisation of their ways.

Yes, that's true. (Although I must add that many Muslims had no problem with the law.) Which is probably why it attracted so much attention in the first place.

The French are pretty good. The British government is far too obsessed with crawling up the arses of the muslim 'community leaders' to effectively fight terrorism. Blair is such a pathetic little man, always begging to the muslim organistations and trying to treat them like they own this country. The spineless cretins that run our country won't send extremists back to their home countries if they may face a little rough treatment back home. But the French recently deported a convicted terrorist back to Tunisia despite the high risk of him facing torture back home. At least the French are willing to play a little dirty to get the job done.

Oooh! You've got a link to that story? That might be a violation of the European Convention of Human Rights, and possibly the United Nations Convention Against Torture.

Oooh! You've got a link to that story? That might be a violation of the European Convention of Human Rights, and possibly the United Nations Convention Against Torture.

Here you are. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5254016.stm)

I'm glad that the French haven't let a bunch of overpaid bureaucrats in Brussels and New York blackmail their country and force them to expose themselves to danger. If only our country had the guts.

Allez les bleus!

Britain did manage to foil an extensive terror plot quite effectively.

So we are told, but as there have been no trials yet I'll reserve judgement. On the previous raid they managed to shoot someone :rolleyes:

Gonna have to go with France on this one.
How many Islamic terrorist attacks resulting in major loss of life have there been on France in the last 6 years?
This tells us that they're obviously doing something right.

I couldn't tell you. The US is pissing off the world, making it worse, the French are doing next to nothing except sending some Foreign Legionnaires' to Afghanistan, and the British.....


.....All in all, gonna have to say Myrth.

How about nuking the terrorists?



http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006-01/2006-01-19-voa95.cfm?CFID=2347425&CFTOKEN=56981953

How about nuking the terrorists?
http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006-01/2006-01-19-voa95.cfm?CFID=2347425&CFTOKEN=56981953

"French president Jacques Chirac said Thursday that France could retaliate with nuclear weapons against states that launch terrorist attacks against it..."

How about nuking the terrorists?



http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006-01/2006-01-19-voa95.cfm?CFID=2347425&CFTOKEN=56981953

Of course, do that, by all means - but only if you have a weapon that ONLY hurts terrorists, as opposed to killing everyone in a given radius.

However, I think you meant "how about nuking the Muslims" - which would be genocide and would accomplish nothing but getting the WORLD at war with the US. And the world would win - or both would be destroyed, but the US would be no more after that.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,440340,00.html
INTERVIEW WITH GERMAN ISLAM EXPERT BASSAM TIBI

"Europeans Have Stopped Defending Their Values"

For years, political scientist Bassam Tibi has been urging Muslims to integrate into European societies and Europe to stand up to Islamists. He spoke with SPIEGEL about the weakness of Europe, the orthodoxy of Islam and what Germany needs to do to open up.

Of particular interest though is this bit here:
SPIEGEL: So who should Schäuble talk to? To you? For many years you have been a proponent of an enlightened form of Euro-Islam -- a topic which has been much discussed. But you are pretty much a lone voice.

Tibi: I support reforming Islam and I am not alone in this. Next month I'm meeting 20 other Islamic reformers in Copenhagen. We are trying to reinvigorate the tradition of enlightening Islam. But our mistake is that we are not united.

SPIEGEL: And apart from these scientists and thinkers?

Tibi: It would be much more important to have enlightened Imams. But when the Alfred Herrhausen society wanted to invite a German-speaking Imam with European ideas to a discussion, no one could be found. In the end they took the Grand Mufti of Marseille. And why are there such people in France and not here? Because the French state and French society has worked on developing them.

SPIEGEL: So the German state should reform Islam?

Tibi: Of course not. But the French state helped set up a council of Muslims which was completely in line with European values. If the French state had not been involved, the council would have probably been in the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood. This is a challenge facing civil society, but the state also has to help. By staying neutral, as is the case here in Germany, you are handing victory over to the Islamists.

SPIEGEL: Schäuble is looking for partners who can help in the teaching of Islam in schools and the training of Imams.

Tibi: That is a good start. The important thing is that the teachers must be trained here and that the state and the society decides on the curriculum.